rampant speculation

[dogbert at clue4all.net (Brian J. Conway)]

> Even gcc 2.95 is not what I would use at this point. I plan on sticking with
> gcc 2.91.66 which is the recommended version for building 2.4 series
> kernels. I have had trouble compiling using 2.95 with 2.4.0 (hove not tried
> 2.4.1 yet). RH 6.2 comes with 2.91.66 and that is one of the reasons I am
> sticking with a system that started out as RH 6.2. It runs 2.4.0 fine so far
> without any problems. Still working on getting sound to work on 2.4 in my
> free time (maybe next year!).

I've had no problems compiling an endless number of kernels with 2.91.66
or 2.95.2, both from the 2.2 and 2.4 series.  I'm kinda curious what
issues you've run into, I haven't seen any in compiling the kernel or
compiling any other app that I can think of.

> If RH, Suse, Turbo, Debian etc. come out with 2.4, I wont be switching
> unless the compiler is 2.91.66. Having a reliable and consistent compiler
> and libraries across the distros is a key to success. When the kernel
> developers state that a version of the compiler is not safe, why do the
> vendors still use it?????

Actually, 2.95.2 was given the okay status a long time ago for 2.4, as
was 2.91.66.  2.7.2.3, which had been the _recommended_ compiler for
2.2, is not considered safe for 2.4 (too many code kluges to work around
the compiler), and either of the two previously mentioned are known to
work without issues.  Until 3.0 is released and considered usable,
2.95.2 seems to be the de facto standard for every distribution I've
taken a look at recently (minus our beloved RedHat).  I kinda like that
whole architecture optimization thing. =)

> What will RedHat do - something stupid because they think they control the
> Linux distribution space (They already do).  But that is what could open the
> door for another vendor going for stability to gain a foothold. I know Suse
> prides itself on being first with many things - anyone know what version of
> gcc and libc the next Suse will ship?? Maybe they have the opportunity to
> take the lead by being first with 2.4 and shipping a solid stable
> development platform.

I'm not sure I agree with the sweeping generalizations in that one, but
I've talked enough.  I know the latest glibc is 2.2.1 without any new
major versions in sight, for what that's worth.  As for the latter
point, I dunno, Mandrake is due out with its next beta imminently,
featuring kernel 2.4.2-almost, glibc 2.2.1, X 4.0.2 plus patches, and
gcc 2.95.2.  I know people think of it as more of a desktop OS than a
development or server environment, but I've found very much otherwise
and that it's often limited by the installer ;-).  I suppose time will
tell best of all.

Brian J. Conway
dogbert at clue4all.net
Geek for hire: http://clue4all.net/resume

Men may control the free world, but women control the boobs.
(http://www.pvponline.com/archive.php3?archive=20001024)
-
Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with
"subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the
message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).